Peckris

Either there's some determined shilling going on (suspicious bidding pattern, yes?), or else someone desperately wants it for the date. But I agree, it's a weird one. You wouldn't raise that for a regular EF halfpenny of that series, so your guess is as good as mine. Richard is not a shiller, so we can put that to bed. Is it lost on you that the date does not exist and does not turn up among forgeries? The price is high because it is contemporary, rare and in good condition for a series that is regularly very poorly produced. No mystery just simple supply and demand. As you see John, that's what I said!! But on that basis, a unique date of a "To Hanover" gaming token or faked spade guinea, should command a similar value. All we're saying is that it's a weirdly high price - albeit a unique date - for what is, at the end of the day, a forgery.

No problem for me. (eBay.com / category Coins > UK Coins / Match by : Ending soonest)

I said it was a LEGAL pyramid, not a scam or illegal. But unlike all your other examples, such schemes involve recruiting people whose own recruitments end up giving you a share of their commission, just as your sales and all your recruits end up paying a proportion of commission to the person who recruited you, and so on up the line. That's the pyramid. Unlike L'Oreal who produce hair care products based on public demand partly generated by advertising but also from reputation. The products are shipped out to wholesalers based on specific orders, and they in turn supply the supermarkets who put the product on their shelves based on public demand. And those supermarkets are all in competition with each other. As for customers, there's nothing to prevent them from going to Asda one week, Tesco the next, Sainsburys the week after. No-one is tied in. L'Oreal sink or swim on the basis of public taste and continued demand. Wholesalers will find other products if necessary. Ditto supermarkets. As for customers, their profits go to the supermarket, plus a portion to the wholesaler and the manufacturer. On the other hand, if L'Oreal decided to supply to person X, who then decided to recruit people Y and Z to generate more sales, and they in turn recruited more people to supply and sell to ... THAT would be a fairer comparison with your scheme. Normal manufacturer / retail practices are not real pyramids.

Either there's some determined shilling going on (suspicious bidding pattern, yes?), or else someone desperately wants it for the date. But I agree, it's a weird one. You wouldn't raise that for a regular EF halfpenny of that series, so your guess is as good as mine.

When I was still dealing I picked up a lot of those 60s blue fivers (around a dozen) for about face value, perhaps a bit more. When I got them home, I saw that one was prefixed M ! Small provincial auctions have their uses - I bet that wouldn't have been missed in London or W&W.

No matter how it is dressed up, it is pyramid selling, it relies on additional layers of sellers beneath you for you to recoup your costs. The people at the top of the tree, and the odd good seller will make their fortune, and use the evidence to convince those further down to join. Inevitably it doesn't take that many layers before the numbers of people required to continue the pattern becomes mammoth. The last ones to hop on board have no chance of convincing others and the bubble bursts leaving them with products for which they have overpaid. The names may have changed but it is the same principles that have been used in previous schemes. That's what I was trying to say. I think "recoup your costs" could be replaced with "make real money" but otherwise you are spot on. It relies on you being emperor at the top of your own pyramid, raking in the commission from your 'subjects', while you yourself are in turn a vassal of someone higher up the tree than you, who is raking in even more. Like you said, a pyramid. A legal pyramid, but a pyramid all the same. You apparently get a $40 commission for each new member you can bring in. Which is presumably why Will was here touting for business. Well, he gets 10 out of 10 for trying!

No matter how it is dressed up, it is pyramid selling, it relies on additional layers of sellers beneath you for you to recoup your costs. The people at the top of the tree, and the odd good seller will make their fortune, and use the evidence to convince those further down to join. Inevitably it doesn't take that many layers before the numbers of people required to continue the pattern becomes mammoth. The last ones to hop on board have no chance of convincing others and the bubble bursts leaving them with products for which they have overpaid. The names may have changed but it is the same principles that have been used in previous schemes. That's what I was trying to say. I think "recoup your costs" could be replaced with "make real money" but otherwise you are spot on. It relies on you being emperor at the top of your own pyramid, raking in the commission from your 'subjects', while you yourself are in turn a vassal of someone higher up the tree than you, who is raking in even more. Like you said, a pyramid. A legal pyramid, but a pyramid all the same.

The thing is, all those past peaks and troughs were each for differing reasons - decimalisation (+ then -), the oil crisis and inflation, the silver bullion bubble, Thatcherism (which I feel sure caused the stagnation from the early 80s to the mid-90s - people had lots of other investment opportunities), the internet. Experts still seem to think the British coin market is undervalued compared to the American market, but is the latter overvalued? It's certainly a different collecting environment compared to ours. However, even if ours is undervalued, it may be seeing weird eBay-induced peaks that will "correct" in the short to medium term, even if the UK coin market as a whole continues a steady rise. No coin bet is entirely safe, though the advice to buy "the best quality you can afford" has never been proved wrong, especially in the long term.

I've got Peck and Freeman on the shelf! It's the Spink pricing, rather than the ID that intrigued me as, presumeably, these prices have come from actual auction sales of type? I'm always up for viewing die and punch information at a deeper level, so will certainly try and dig out the 51 Will PM later, thanks again! Ouija board, I'd heard?

logically there ought to be 1915 recessed ears without the chipped tooth, yet to find one though! I suppose it's always possible that the RM used the chipped tooth as a positive ID to test how the 'recessed ears' fared in circulation? In that case they would all be of the chipped variety. Very well, judging by the diminution of ghosting, the fully struck up reverses, and the preservation of hair detail. I always wondered why they didn't persist with it.

The 1943 three pence stands a chance, but only if it's a silver 3d and in high grade, and even then we're not talking megabucks! Damn! Couldn't they have found a non-recessed ear variety to engrave?? That'll be the exceedingly rare recessed ear variety without the broken border tooth then? I have no idea? It's a recessed ear anyway. I believe current wisdom is that all recessed ear pennies from 1915 & 1916 have the chipped tooth by the I of BRITT. I searched this forum and noted you had posted your own 1915 example which also exhibits the chipped tooth. There maybe those that don't, but certainly VR Court doesn't mention any. The tooth by the I is very indistinct, so it could be a half tooth I guess? The characterics of the obverse appear to be those of a recessed ear, but with major surgery to the reverse, it's not clear cut I suppose. what is 'the tooth' and what is a 'recessed ear'? I know near enough nothing about coins haha. Teeth are those little bits that make up a circle just inside the rim. That particular penny variety has a broken tooth by one of the letters in BRITT. The "recessed ear" variety (1915 and 1916 only) is fairly obscure, and to be honest, is often missed even by experts, it's not really obvious. Even then, it's not rare, merely scarce, and isn't worth even twice as much as the regular issue. So no big bucks to be made from it.

There is/was a similar scheme involving Natural Health products (vitamins and other supplements). As you say Will, these are not pyramid schemes per se i.e. they are perfectly legal. I looked into joining this other scheme (this was in the 90s) but after reading the literature thoroughly, I concluded that it involved more time and effort and recruitment than I was prepared to put in. As ever, those who are prepared to make a career out of it, and have a natural talent for it, can probably make a fair amount of money out of it. But that's not many (most?) of us. As has been said, this is a forum for grumpy old collectors to chew the fat, show off their latest acquisitions, discuss varieties old and new, talk about the future of the hobby, moan about eBay, etc. I accept you're not the average spammer we have to endure (they never reply to their spams), but equally you might find more profitable responses in a forum devoted to investment methods. If I've got this badly wrong, I'm happy to be corrected, but it looks like too much of an effort to me. "There's no such thing as a free lunch". Really. There isn't.

The 1943 three pence stands a chance, but only if it's a silver 3d and in high grade, and even then we're not talking megabucks! Damn! Couldn't they have found a non-recessed ear variety to engrave?? That'll be the exceedingly rare recessed ear variety without the broken border tooth then? I have no idea? It's a recessed ear anyway. I believe current wisdom is that all recessed ear pennies from 1915 & 1916 have the chipped tooth by the I of BRITT. I searched this forum and noted you had posted your own 1915 example which also exhibits the chipped tooth. There maybe those that don't, but certainly VR Court doesn't mention any. The tooth by the I is very indistinct, so it could be a half tooth I guess? The characterics of the obverse appear to be those of a recessed ear, but with major surgery to the reverse, it's not clear cut I suppose.

I do believe he likes a good dig. Still looking for turnips

My points exactly. (BTW you forgot to attach pictures of your 2p )

The 1943 three pence stands a chance, but only if it's a silver 3d and in high grade, and even then we're not talking megabucks! Damn! Couldn't they have found a non-recessed ear variety to engrave?? That'll be the exceedingly rare recessed ear variety without the broken border tooth then? I have no idea? It's a recessed ear anyway.

20 years for arson hmm? He'd have been released just in time ... to be conscripted for WW1 What about the other guy that got 8 months for stealing flour White powder, hmm? Always trouble, that.

Damn! Couldn't they have found a non-recessed ear variety to engrave??

I haven't time to read all the other posts here. But my advice I hope will regarde widely as sound. First, decide on something you LIKE, that you would glow with pleasure and pride to see at the centre of your collection. Second, having identified the type of coin you love best, go for an example in the highest condition you can afford - those hold their value best. Don't worry about gold vs silver vs copper - metal content isn't important to this decision. You're a collector not an investor. Third, if you can afford one of the rarer examples of your chosen type, so much the better, but condition is more important. Fourth, find a good reputable dealer to buy from, and avoid eBay. It only remains to say good luck, and once you've answered the first point, come back for more advice on your chosen type or series if you would like to.

The beauty here, at least to my mind is what it tells you about the history of the times. Basically, civilisation was in decline from the 4th century A.D., didn't really begin to catch up again until the Renaissance, and coins reflect that. Between the two dates civilisation was hamstrung by the dead hand of Christian orthodoxy in both material and sociological terms and the coins of the times appear to be in the doldrums both in their design and the care taken in their production. To my mind the point at which coins begin to turn the corner are the profile issues of Henry VII, which exactly correspond to the beginnings of the revival in classical learning. Hope you don't me saying Derek - that's now "old history". The Romans were pretty well assimilated into the Celtic British by the time that the legions left. There's archaeological evidence from Ireland and NW England and Cornwall that Britain traded actively with Europe for several hundred years, and that Charlemagne regarded Celtic art and literature among the flower of civilisation. And medieval thought and literature and philosophy and science and education has been long overlooked by the achievements of the Renaissance, but in many respects was of a high order. The Dark Ages are only so-called because we don't know so much about them as we do about the Romans and the Normans onwards. I think it's in technology that Europe fell way behind, and that too is reflected in the coins. I happen to love the achievements of the Classical era and laterthe Renaissance, but that doesn't mean that everything in between was a hopeless and barbaric mess with no redeeming features.

Not weird so much - remember, they didn't have reducing machines, so the matrix they worked from was the size of the actual coin : it's actually a tribute to them that there wasn't more in the way of errors.

20 years for arson hmm? He'd have been released just in time ... to be conscripted for WW1

I always thought that the Kingdom of Unknow had never issued the pink and black denominations? C'mon, what's the problem? It's an english Edward XIV threeqarter-pence, copper sovereign, without stops, legend starting at 24 minutes past seven! Some people just want to be hand-held through the entire process!

It's usually for one of two reasons - either the first attempt was poorly done, or the die has begun to wear badly at that point. It's very common before the early 1880s when the technology changed. Despite the very very many posts here by hopeful members, it is unlikely to have affected the value. Occasionally you get things like a 1787 shilling or an 1882H penny described as having a 'retrograde 1 over 1", but usually a repunched date or legend doesn't cause much excitement. Unless the underlying character is different.

I'm afraid my name is not "Bbobbb".